Since the beginning of 2017, when I stepped in as editor for Nordic Studies on Alcohol and Drugs (NAD) the editorial material of the journal shows a clear pattern: we are increasingly focusing on the conditions of knowledge and their conceptual consequences. At the editorial office we have, both in editorials and in commissioned material, paid special attention to circumstances of knowledge production. This refers for example to the space of action and claims of relevance by social science research in view of “a giant isomorphic wheel of public health” (Hellman, 2018a); the greater interest in funding research by commercial forces intent on skewing the science agenda (Hellman, 2018b); new approaches to explaining trends in use patterns (Hellman, 2018c; Kataja, Tigerstedt, & Hakkarainen, 2018); how we are to understand the epistemic project of the addicted brain (Hellman, 2018d); and circumstances that pressurise the qualitative research agenda by demands of availability and applicability in a narrow sense (Edman, 2017; Hellman, 2017; Järvinen-Tassopoulos, 2017), to name just a few.

中文翻译：

---

知识生产的概念和条件

自 2017 年初，当我担任北欧酒精和毒品研究 (NAD) 的编辑时，该期刊的编辑材料显示出一个清晰的模式：我们越来越关注知识的条件及其概念后果。在编辑部，我们在社论和委托材料中都特别关注知识生产的情况。例如，这指的是社会科学研究的行动空间和相关声明，鉴于“公共卫生的巨大同构轮”（Hellman，2018a）；意图扭曲科学议程的商业力量对资助研究的兴趣更大（Hellman，2018b）；解释使用模式趋势的新方法（Hellman，2018c；Kataja、Tigerstedt 和 Hakkarainen，2018）；我们如何理解成瘾大脑的认知项目（Hellman，2018d）；狭义上的可用性和适用性要求对定性研究议程施加压力（埃德曼，2017 年；赫尔曼，2017 年；Järvinen-Tassopoulos，2017 年），仅举几例。